Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-6dbcb7884d-wnk8j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-14T03:09:16.508Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

18 - Constructions and Language Contact

from Part V - Constructions in Sociocultural and Typological Variation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 January 2025

By
Marianne Mithun
Edited by
Mirjam Fried  and
Kiki Nikiforidou
Mirjam Fried
Affiliation:
Univerzita Karlova
Kiki Nikiforidou
Affiliation:
University of Athens, Greece
Get access

Summary

After a long tradition of studying languages as isolated systems, researchers are increasingly aware of the fact that speakers of most of the world’s languages are multilingual. The coexistence of multiple languages within the brain can be a significant force shaping each. The recognition of constructions and their arrays of constructional properties provides a useful tool for understanding contact phenomena: much of what is transferred in contact situations are constructions or constructional features. Conversely, examination of what is replicated can enhance our understanding of the nature of linguistic knowledge. Here replicated constructions of varying sizes and degrees of schematicity are first described, from words through discourse structures, then the transfer of individual constructional features, including prosody, special connotations, various pragmatic effects, linguistic and extralinguistic contexts of use, and frequency are discussed, as well as the social situations under which they occur. The kinds of constructions and constructional properties replicated provide additional evidence that constructions are more than simple combinations of basic form and meaning.

Keywords

constructional featuresdiscoursefrequencylanguage contactpragmaticeffectsprosody
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Construction Grammar , pp. 469 - 496
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2025

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aikhenvald, A. Y. (2003). Mechanisms of change in areal diffusion: New morphology and language contact. Journal of Linguistics, 39, 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aikhenvald, A. Y. (2004). Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ameka, F. (2006). Grammars in contact in the Volta Basin (West Africa): On contact-induced grammatical change in Likpe. In Aikhenvald, A. Y. & Dixon, R. M. W., eds., Grammars in Contact: A Cross-Linguistic Typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 114–142.Google Scholar
Ameka, F. (2011). ‘When I die don’t cry’: The ethnopragmatics of “gratitude” in West African languages. In Goddard, C., ed., Ethnopragmatics: Understanding Discourse in Natural Context. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 231–266.Google Scholar
Andrade, M. J. (1931). Quileute. In Boas, F., ed., Handbook of American Indian Languages, 3rd edition. New York: Columbia University, pp. 151–292.Google Scholar
Andrade, M. J. (1933 [1969]). Quileute Texts. New York: Columbia University. Reprinted 1969 in New York: AMS Press.Google Scholar
Andrade, M. J. (1953). Relations between Nootka and Quileute. International Journal of American Linguistics, 19, 138–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balodis, U. (2016). Yuki Grammar. Berkeley: University of California.Google Scholar
Bean, L. J. & Theodoratus, D. (1978). Western Pomo and Northeastern Pomo. In Heizer, R. F., ed., Handbook of North American Indians 8: California. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution, pp. 306–323.Google Scholar
Belyaev, O. (2019). Contact influences on Ossetic. In Grant, A. P., ed., The Oxford Handbook of Language Contact. Oxford: Oxford University, pp. 467–493.Google Scholar
Boas, F. (1947). Kwakiutl Grammar with a Glossary of the Suffixes. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boas, H. C. & Höder, S. (2018). Construction Grammar and language contact. An introduction. In Boas, H. C. & Höder, S., eds., Constructions in Contact: Constructional Perspectives on Contact Phenomena in Germanic Languages. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 5–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boas, H. C. & Höder, S., eds. (2021). Constructions in Contact 2. Language Change, Multilingual Practices, and Additional Language Acquisition. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J. (2013). Usage-based theory and exemplar representations of constructions. In Hoffmann, T. & Trousdale, G., eds., The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 51–64.Google Scholar
Callaghan, C. (1965). Lake Miwok Dictionary. Berkeley: University of California.Google Scholar
Chaker, S. (1989). Arabisation. In Encyclopedia Berbere. Edisud: Aix-en-Provence, pp. 834–843. https://doi.org/10.4000/encyclopedieberbere.2570.Google Scholar
Coghill, E. (2019). Northeastern Neo-Aramaic and language contact. In Grant, A. P., ed., The Oxford Handbook of Language Contact. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 494–518.Google Scholar
Daniel, M., Molochieva, Z., & Khalilova, Z. (2010). Ditransitive constructions in East Caucasian. In Malchukov, A., Haspelmath, M., & Comrie, B., eds., Studies in Ditransitive Constructions: A Comparative Handbook. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, pp. 277–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Vries, L. (2005). Towards a typology of tail-head linkage in Papuan languages. Studies in Language, 29(2), 363–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enghels, R. & Sansiñena, M. S. (2021a). Introduction. In Enghels, R. & Sansiñena, M. S., eds., Constructional Approach(es) to Discourse-Level Phenomena: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges. Special issue of Constructions and Frames, 13(1), 3–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enghels, R. & Sansiñena, M. S., eds. (2021b). Constructional Approach(es) to Discourse-level Phenomena: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges. Special issue of Constructions and Frames, 13(1).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epps, P. (2005). Areal diffusion and the development of evidentiality: Evidence from Hup. Studies in Language, 29(3), 617–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Epps, P. & Michael, L. (2017). The areal linguistics of Amazonia. In Hickey, R., ed., The Cambridge Handbook of Areal Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 934–963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, C. J. (1974/1981). Pragmatics and the description of discourse. In Cole, P., ed., Radical Pragmatics (reprint of Berkeley Studies in Syntax and Semantics, 1974). Academic Press, pp. 143–166.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. J., Kay, P., & O’Connor, M. C. (1988). Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone. Language, 64, 501–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
François, A. (2011). Social ecology and language history in the northern Vanuatu linkage: A tale of divergence and convergence. Journal of Historical Linguistics, 1(2), 175–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeland, L. S. (1947). Western Miwok texts with linguistic sketch. International Journal of American Linguistics, 13(1), 31–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fried, M. (2015). Construction Grammar. In Alexiadou, A. & Kiss, T., eds., Syntax: Theory and Analysis. Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 974–1003.Google Scholar
Fried, M. (2021). Discourse-referential patterns as a network of grammatical constructions. In Enghels, R. & Sansiñena, M. S., eds., Constructional Approach(es) to Discourse-Level Phenomena: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges. Special issue of Constructions and Frames, 13(1), pp. 21–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fried, M. & Östman, J.-O. (2004). Construction Grammar: A thumbnail sketch. In Fried, M. & Östman, J.-O., eds., Construction Grammar in a Cross-Language Perspective. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 11–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fried, M. & Östman, J.-O. (2005). Construction Grammar and spoken language: The case of pragmatic particles. Journal of Pragmatics, 37(11), 1752–1778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garbell, I. (1965). The impact of Kurdish and Turkish on the Jewish Neo-Aramaic dialect of Persian Azerbaijan and the adjoining regions. Journal of the American Oriental Society, 85(2), 159–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gras, P. & Elvira-García, W. (2021). The role of intonation in Construction Grammar: On prosodic constructions. Journal of Pragmatics, 180, 232–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gutiérrez-Morales, S. (2008). Borrowing and Grammaticalization in Sierra Popoluca: The Influence of Nahuatl and Spanish. PhD thesis. University of California Santa Barbara.Google Scholar
Harrington, J. P. (1986). Fieldnotes on Barbareño Chumash. Boxes 410–485, 491–506, National Anthropological Archives, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC. Microfilm reels 59–66, indexed in Mills, E. & Brickfield, A., eds., The Papers of John Peabody Harrington in the Smithsonian Institution 1907–1957, Vol. 3: Native American History, Language and Culture of S. CA/Basin. Milwood: Kraus.Google Scholar
Harris, J. (1993). The grammar of Irish English. In Milroy, J. & Milroy, L., eds., Real English: The Grammar of the English Dialects in the British Isles. London: Longman, pp. 139–186.Google Scholar
Hayward, R. (1991). A propos patterns of lexicalization in the Ethiopian language area. In Mendel, D. & Clauci, U., eds., Ägypten im afro-orientalischen Kontext. Cologne: Institute of African Studies, pp. 139–156.Google Scholar
Hayward, R. (2000). Is there a metric for convergence? In Renfrew, C., McMahon, A., & Trask, R. L., eds., Time Depth in Historical Linguistics. Papers in the Prehistory of Languages, Vol. 2. Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, pp. 621–640.Google Scholar
Hellwig, B. (2019). Language contact in the West Chadic language Goemai. In Grant, A. P., ed., The Oxford Handbook of Language Contact. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 431–448.Google Scholar
Hickey, R. (2017). Britain and Ireland. In Hickey, R., ed., The Cambridge Handbook of Areal Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 270–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hilpert, M. (2016). Change in modal meanings: Another look at the shifting collocates of may. Constructions and Frames, 8(1), 66–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hilpert, M. & Östman, J.-O. (2014a). Introduction: Reflections on constructions across grammars. Constructions and Frames, 6(2), 137–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hilpert, M. & Östman, J.-O., eds. (2014b). Special issue, Constructions and Frames, 6(2).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Höder, S. (2012). Multilingual constructions. A diasystematic approach to common structures. In Braunmüller, K. & Gabriel, C., eds., Multilingual Individuals and Multilingual Societies. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 241–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Höder, S. (2014a). Constructing diasystems: Grammatical organisation in bilingual groups. In Afarli, T. A., & Mæhlum, B., eds., The Sociolinguistics of Grammar. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 137–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Höder, S. (2014b). Phonological elements and diasystematic Construction Grammar. Constructions and Frames, 6, 202–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Höder, S. (2014c). Convergence vs divergence from a diasystematic perspective. In Braunmüller, K., Höder, S., & Kühl, K., eds., Stability and Divergence in Language Contact. Factors and Mechanisms. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 39–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Höder, S. (2018). Grammar is community-specific: Background and basic concepts of diasystematic Construction Grammar. In Boas, H. C. & Höder, S., eds., Constructions in Contact. Constructional Perspectives on Contact Phenomena in Germanic Languages. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 37–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Höder, S. (2019). Phonological schematicity in multilingual constructions: A diasystematic perspective on lexical form. Word Structure, 12(3), 334–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hollenbach, B. (1995). Semantic and syntactic extensions of body-part terms in Mixtecan: The case of face and foot. International Journal of American Linguistics, 61(2), 168–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johanson, L., Csató, É., & Karakoç, B. (2020). Turkic language contacts. In Hickey, R., ed., The Handbook of Language Contact, 2nd edition. Hoboken: Wiley Blackwell, pp. 551–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, A. (1988). A syntactic sketch of Jamiltepec Mixtec. In Studies in the Syntax of Mixtecan Languages I. Summer Institute of Linguistics Publications in Linguistics, 83. Dallas: SIL and the University of Texas, pp. 11–150.Google Scholar
Kaltenböck, G. (2016). On the grammatical status of insubordinate if-clauses. In Kaltenböck, G., Keizer, E., & Lohmann, A., eds., Outside the Clause: Form and Function of Extra-Clausal Constituents. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 341–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koptjevskaja-Tamm, M. & Liljegren, H. (2017). Semantic patterns from an areal perspective. In Hickey, R., ed., The Cambridge Handbook of Areal Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 204–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marandin, J.-M. (2006). Contours as constructions. In Schönefeld, D., ed., Constructions All Over: Case Studies and Theoretical Implications. Constructions. SV1-10/2006. https://doi.org/10.24338/cons-448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matisoff, J. (2004). Areal semantics: Is there such a thing? In Saxene, A., ed., Himalayan Languages: Past and Present. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 347–393.Google Scholar
Mithun, M. (1988). The grammaticization of coordination. In Haiman, J. & Thompson, S., eds., Clause Combining in Grammar and Discourse. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 331–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mithun, M. (2007a). Integrating approaches to diversity: Argument structure on the Northwest Coast. In Matsumoto, Y., Oshima, D., Robinson, O., & Sells, P., eds., Diversity in Language. Stanford: CSLI Publications, pp. 9–36.Google Scholar
Mithun, M. (2007b). Grammar, contact, and time. Journal of Language Contact, 1, 133–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mithun, M. (2012). Morphologies in contact: Form, meaning, and use in the grammar of reference. In Stolz, T., Vanhove, M., Otsuka, H., & Urdzu, A., eds., Morphologies in Contact. Berlin: Akademia Verlag, pp. 15–36.Google Scholar
Mithun, M. (2020a). Context and consciousness: Documenting evidentials. In Brzech, K., Schultze-Berndt, E., & Bergqvist, H., eds., Knowing in Interaction: Empirical Approaches to Epistemicity and Intersubjectivity in Language. Special issue of Folia Linguistica, 54(2), 317–342.Google Scholar
Mithun, M. (2020b). Contact and North American languages. In Hickey, R., ed., Handbook of Language Contact, 2nd edition. Oxford: Wiley Blackwell, pp. 593–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mithun, M. (2021a). Stories behind post-verbal negation clustering. In Krasnoukhova, O., Crevels, M. & van der Auwera, J., eds., Postverbal Negation: Synchrony, Diachrony, Areality. Special Issue of Studies in Language, 45(3), 684–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mithun, M. (2021b). Sitting and talking together: Packaging meaning into verbs with the neighbors. In Koptjevskaja-Tamm, M., Schapper, A., & Ameka, F., eds., Areal Typology of Lexico-Semantics. Special Issue of Linguistic Typology, 26(2), 375–402.Google Scholar
Mithun, M. (2021c). Language contact in North America. In Adamou, E. & Matras, Y., eds., Routledge Handbook of Language Contact. New York: Routledge, pp. 503–527.Google Scholar
Mithun, M. (2022). Topicality, affectedness, and body-part grammar. In Zariquiey, R. & Valenzuela, P. M., eds., The Grammar of Body Parts. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 286–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Næss, Å. (2019). Bidirectional borrowing of structure and lexicon: The case of the Reef Islands. In Grant, A., ed., The Oxford Handbook of Language Contact. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 627–642.Google Scholar
Nakayama, T., ed. (2003). George Louie’s Nuu-chah-nulth (Ahousaht) Texts with Grammatical Analysis. Endangered Languages of the Pacific Rim A2-028. Kyoto: Nakanishi Printing Co.Google Scholar
Nikiforidou, K., Marmaridou, S., & Miros, G. K. (2014). What’s in a dialogic construction? A constructional approach to polysemy and the grammar of challenge. Cognitive Linguistics, 25(4), 655–699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ogden, R. (2010). Prosodic constructions in making complaints. In Barth-Weingarten, D., Reber, E., & Selting, M., eds., Prosody in Interaction. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 81–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olguín Martínez, J. (2022). Temporal Adverbial Clauses in the Languages of the World: Clause-Linking Strategies. PhD thesis. University of California Santa Barbara.Google Scholar
Östman, J.-O. (2005). Construction Discourse: A prolegomenon. In Östman, J.-O. & Fried, M., eds., Construction Grammars: Cognitive Grounding and Theoretical Extensions. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 121–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Östman, J.-O. (2015). From Construction Grammar to Construction Discourse … and back. In Bücker, J., Günthner, S., & Imo, W., eds., Konstruktionsgrammatik V: Konstruktionen im Spannungsfeld von sequenziellen Mustern, kommunikativen Gattungen und Textsorten. Tübingen: Stauffenburg, pp. 15–44.Google Scholar
Östman, J.-O. (2020). Constructions as discourse-restrained flexible prototypes. Belgian Journal of Linguistics, 34(1), 273–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Östman, J.-O. & Fried, M., eds. (2004). Construction Grammar in a Cross-Language Perspective, Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Östman, J.-O. & Trousdale, G. (2013). Dialects, discourse, and Construction Grammar. In Hoffmann, T. & Trousdale, G., eds., The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 476–490.Google Scholar
Packendorf, B. (2020). Contact and Siberian languages. In Hickey, R., ed., The Handbook of Language Contact. Hoboken: Wiley & Sons, pp. 669–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piirainen, E. (2012). Widespread Idioms in Europe and Beyond: Toward a Lexicon of Common Figurative Units. New York: Peter Lang.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pitkin, H. (1984). Wintu Grammar. Berkeley: University of California.Google Scholar
Radin, P. (1924). Wappo Texts, 1st series. University of California Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology, 19(1), 1–147.Google Scholar
Sadat-Tehrani, N. (2008). An intonational construction. Constructions, 5. https://doi.org/10.24338/cons-451.Google Scholar
Sakel, J. (2007). Mosetén borrowing from Spanish. In Matras, Y. & Sakel, J., eds., Grammatical Borrowing in Cross-linguistic Perspective. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 567–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sawyer, J. (1965). English-Wappo Vocabulary. Berkeley: University of California.Google Scholar
Slater, K. (2003). A Grammar of Mangghuer, a Mongolic language of China’s Qinghai-Gansu Sprachbund. London & New York: Routledge Curzon.Google Scholar
Smith-Stark, T. (1994). Mesoamerican calques. In MacKay, C. & Vásques, V., eds., Investigaciones lingüísticas en Mesoamérica. Mexico: Universidad Nacional Autónomal de México, pp. 15–50.Google Scholar
Souag, L. (2019). Language contact in Berber. In Grant, A., ed., The Oxford Handbook of Language Contact. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 449–466.Google Scholar
Suárez, J. (1983). The Mesoamerican Indian Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomason, S. G. & Kaufman, T. (1988). Language Contact, Creolization, and Genetic Linguistics. Berkeley: University of California.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, N. (2019). Prosodic Patterns in English Conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×